• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Trump wants whistleblower to do something Trump refused to do!

NebraskaFtball said:
No kidding. It is very frustrating, as logic is something my entire life has been shaped around. It almost physically hurts to see so much lack of it on display. And in defense of Donald freaking Trump of all people? :confused:
Click to expand...

It's like eight years of Obama paranoia has come to pass in the form of Donald J. Trump... Dotard to his friends.
 
less right said:
What/where is the evidence of this "right"?

Is it constitutional? Court precedent? Legislation?

What gives you the "right"?
Click to expand...

Are you saying the people don't have a right to see the WB testify?
 
Lutherf said:
I merely don't believe that all the hype around this whistleblower's safety close to warranted. The transcript is out. We know what the whistleblower believes. The only other stuff we might hear would be with regard to his interactions with Schiff's staff and, frankly, I have reason to believe THAT is far more important to Schiff than the guy's safety.
Click to expand...

Yeah that's what people said about Jeffery Epstein, then all the cameras went off and all the guards went on break...
 
less right said:
What/where is the evidence of this "right"?

Is it constitutional? Court precedent? Legislation?

What gives you the "right"?
Click to expand...

apdst said:
Are you saying the people don't have a right to see the WB testify?
Click to expand...

I'm saying that. And I am also curious where you get this belief in a "right" here. Links?
 
less right said:
You said we have the right. Where does it come from?
Click to expand...

Are you saying we don't? Our elected representives can do everything in secret, without our knowledge?
 
apdst said:
The people have a right to hear him testify.
Click to expand...

No we don't,he is not a witness, just an anonymous informant.

If we drag all informants into the public eye, everyone will keep their mouths shut.
That is why the whistleblower laws were put in place.
Just because trump and his cultists want to make him a target makes it even more clear why we need whistleblower protections...
 
GDViking said:
No we don't,he is not a witness, just an anonymous informant.

If we drag all informants into the public eye, everyone will keep their mouths shut.
That is why the whistleblower laws were put in place.
Just because trump and his cultists want to make him a target makes it even more clear why we need whistleblower protections...
Click to expand...

He is just trolling.

Don't waste your time talking to him, he gets his rocks off doing this sort of thing.
 
GDViking said:
No we don't,he is not a witness, just an anonymous informant.

If we drag all informants into the public eye, everyone will keep their mouths shut.
That is why the whistleblower laws were put in place.
Just because trump and his cultists want to make him a target makes it even more clear why we need whistleblower protections...
Click to expand...

Ok....
 
apdst said:
Are you saying the people don't have a right to see the WB testify?
Click to expand...

Whether the WB testifies or not is irrelevant, just like it was irrelevant that Deep Throat never testified during Watergate. Now that the initial accusations have been confirmed by more knowledgeable sources who have more direct first-hand knowledge, any testimonial evidence the WB could possibly offer is superfluous.
 
apdst said:
Wow! We don't have a right to know? Incredible!
Click to expand...

So...are you going to point to something other than your biased opinion here? Something in law? Something in the Constitution. Anything at all to back up your assertion?
 
apdst said:
Are you saying we don't? Our elected representives can do everything in secret, without our knowledge?
Click to expand...

You're not answering the question.

WHere do we get that right? If you don't know, just say so.

Also, yes to secret meetings, your elected reps do that all the time. In this instance though you've been "Trumped". Your representatives can attend the secret meetings in your place, both Reps and Dems. The Reps lied about not having access.

This is an inquiry, think 'grand jury', not a trial. That's when due process happens for defendants.
 
Last edited:
apdst said:
The whistle blower (if he exists) leveled an accusation. It's on him to show up and tell his side of the story. The people have a right to see him testify publically.
Click to expand...

God do you people know anything. The WB had someone tell him of something that came up in Trump's call to the president of ukraine and the WB thought there was something wrong. He reported it to his supervisor as he was supposed to do. The supervisor investigated the problem and found it wa not only serious but required immediate attention and made the mistake of sending it to Barr instead of as the law requires it be sent to congress as required by law. Barr did nothing, which violates the law concerning WB's and then it went too the Congress where it should have gone instead of Barr. Both Barr and the supervisor should be called before congress to answer why they failed to follow the law.
 
independentusa said:
God do you people know anything. The WB had someone tell him of something that came up in Trump's call to the president of ukraine and the WB thought there was something wrong. He reported it to his supervisor as he was supposed to do. The supervisor investigated the problem and found it wa not only serious but required immediate attention and made the mistake of sending it to Barr instead of as the law requires it be sent to congress as required by law. Barr did nothing, which violates the law concerning WB's and then it went too the Congress where it should have gone instead of Barr. Both Barr and the supervisor should be called before congress to answer why they failed to follow the law.
Click to expand...

That's a lie. He went to Schiff's office with it, first. If he actually exists, that is.
 
lwf said:
Be careful what you wish for. The Supreme Court has ruled that any form of retaliation against whistleblowers who provide truthful information about potential federal crimes to federal law enforcement is unconstitutional and obstruction of justice. Giving Trump the whistleblower's name while he is president might be giving him a noose to hang himself with.
Click to expand...

He already has enough rope and every day he orders people to break the law he adds another wrap to the knot on his noose... ( A proper one has thirteen)
 
beefheart said:
He is just trolling.

Don't waste your time talking to him, he gets his rocks off doing this sort of thing.
Click to expand...

I know, I just have time to kill and it's more fun than poking a dead cat with a stick...
 
Lutherf said:
I don't care if we ever get the guy's name. I merely want to hear about his interactions with Schiff's people and others that prompted him to file the report.
Click to expand...

That’s one of the many things I would like to know the answer to, in this entire saga.

That’s not what Trump cares about.

He wants the person outed, so he can do his character assasination thing, and sic his lickspittle flunkies on whoever it is, not to mention the goon chorus of right wing trash media.
 
Cordelier said:
Whether the WB testifies or not is irrelevant, just like it was irrelevant that Deep Throat never testified during Watergate. Now that the initial accusations have been confirmed by more knowledgeable sources who have more direct first-hand knowledge, any testimonial evidence the WB could possibly offer is superfluous.
Click to expand...
Exactly, the only reason you track down the person who pulled the fire alarm is to give them a medal, not to grill them why they smelled smoke, could that smoke been burning ramen, or a fireplace.

The guy pulled the alarm because it was an emergency...
 
apdst said:
Unless the WB broke the law. Then, he doesn't receive those protections.

And this case, if he actually exists. How would it look if the whole impeachment requiry was based on a person that doesn't exist?
Click to expand...

I hate to break it to you, Apdst... but the WB became irrelevant once the White House released the Memorandum of the July 25 conversation. If this were a boxing match, that was the equivalent of leading with your chin. All the Democrats have been doing since is hammering that target with witness after witness.

I haven't seen or heard of any evidence presented by anyone thus far that has disputed any claims made by WB.... have you?
 
apdst said:
That's a lie. He went to Schiff's office with it, first. If he actually exists, that is.
Click to expand...

Do you really even entertain the thought that shift would admit that he contacted his office if he did not exist, or had any inappropriate contact for that matter???

Hell trump is still denying **** that he is on camera saying.

In today's day and age of excepting lies as the truth, why would shift tell the truth if he was as corrupt as you claim???
 
GDViking said:
Exactly, the only reason you track down the person who pulled the fire alarm is to give them a medal, not to grill them why they smelled smoke, could that smoke been burning ramen, or a fireplace.

The guy pulled the alarm because it was an emergency...
Click to expand...

Exactly... if that's the best the Republicans have got - "The WB isn't credible because he hasn't identified himself yet"... then they seriously need to re-evaluate their position here. Everything the WB has asserted has been confirmed not only by the steady parade of witnesses the Democrats have called, but by the President's own words in the July 25 conversation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom